7 Nov
2016
7 Nov
'16
1:31 a.m.
On 7 November 2016 at 10:21, Lieven <levinius@gmx.de> wrote:
Actually, I'm pretty happy to be able to say now {latlh loD SoH net jalchugh, vaj qaHoH.}, but I would have preferred it be done with a different kind of suffix. But Okrand told us this weekend, that according to Maltz, we should have received nearly all of the existing suffixes - but there may be more, perhabs.
It would be very weird, at this point, to get any more (let's say, "modern {ta' Hol}") suffixes, considering the volume of canon we have. What are the chances that a commonplace suffix would fail to appear in important Klingon works such as {paq'batlh} and {Hamlet}? -- De'vID